Race in college admissions is back in front of the Supreme Court Oral Argument on Oct. 31 (Monday)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a white person with both white kids and asian kids. I do not think my asian kids raised in the same house should have to score 300 points higher on the SAT for the same shot at admissions to my alma mater (Harvard). That is pure racism and I will never vote democrat again after seeing how they support this.

Yeah.. having to score 300 points more than a rich white lax bro for the same shot is a travesty.

Your grievances are misguided.

The truth is that legacy admissions are the real issue.

If your kid can't get into Harvard with that advantage (assuming all of the high dollar test prep and cushy tutoring worked), then sorry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So will it help white male applicants? Especially low income? I have a horse in this race lol

Not at most universities. It’s currently a huge advantage to be male at most schools so males may lose their preferential treatment. There are exceptions.

It’s the first time I hear about the advantage of being male, unless it’s a liberal arts school

From Georgetown’s website “The Wall Street Journal recently highlighted the shifting representation of men and women on U.S. college campuses, pointing out that men accounted for 71 percent of the overall enrollment decline across the last five years—and 78 percent of pandemic-related drop-outs. As of spring 2021, women made up 59.5 percent of all U.S. college students, a record high.” But women have been majority of college students for past forty years. One factor is the greater availability of well-paying jobs not requiring a degree that are traditionally male or currently male-dominated (including the trades). While traditionally female jobs like teaching and nursing can be lower paid but still require degrees.

Thank you, I hope it will help my son but not holding my breath just yet

It won’t, with limited exceptions, assuming universities have to stop their current preferential admission of male students to avoid going over 60% female (widely considered a tipping point for campus culture).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So will it help white male applicants? Especially low income? I have a horse in this race lol

Not at most universities. It’s currently a huge advantage to be male at most schools so males may lose their preferential treatment. There are exceptions.

As an example, look at the Brown Univ cds. About 10k more female applicants but nearly equal number of admissions. I’d anticipate a school like that turning more female.

More applicants =/= more qualified applicants.

And now do STEM programs. They’ll become overwhelmingly male.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Higher education shoud be mainly for acedemic merit and must be color blind.

Nothing in America is colorblind.

It ought to be. Dividing people with this new era of identity politics isn’t helping. There is way too much division going on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How will this affect universities trying for gender parity? Eg 39,000 female applicants and 22,000 make applicants but they admit males at higher rate to have a near 50-50 class?

Depends on how narrow or wide the SC rules against affirmative action.

Forgot to add that Noah Feldman (Harvard Law) addressed this:

Universities would no longer be allowed to pursue racial diversity, gender diversity, sexual orientation diversity or religious diversity. (They would still be allowed to pursue economic diversity, class diversity, viewpoint diversity and geographic diversity, because these categories aren’t protected against discrimination by the Constitution or civil rights laws.) https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/supreme-court-will-end-the-era-of-college-diversity/2022/10/16/4716c656-4d53-11ed-ada8-04e6e6bf8b19_story.html

Wouldn’t this make single gender colleges illegal? What about universities - like BYU - will religious affiliation requirements?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or even neutral ideas around science. Remember when conservatives were the "anti-science" party? Science and math are now out the window at these schools.

I’m sorry but what is neutral science?

Letting flag earthers welcome in the college discussion

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a white person with both white kids and asian kids. I do not think my asian kids raised in the same house should have to score 300 points higher on the SAT for the same shot at admissions to my alma mater (Harvard). That is pure racism and I will never vote democrat again after seeing how they support this.

Yeah.. having to score 300 points more than a rich white lax bro for the same shot is a travesty.

Your grievances are misguided.

The truth is that legacy admissions are the real issue.

If your kid can't get into Harvard with that advantage (assuming all of the high dollar test prep and cushy tutoring worked), then sorry.

You can have more than one real issue: legacies, Asian Americans, athletes, etc. They are all problematic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a white person with both white kids and asian kids. I do not think my asian kids raised in the same house should have to score 300 points higher on the SAT for the same shot at admissions to my alma mater (Harvard). That is pure racism and I will never vote democrat again after seeing how they support this.

Yeah.. having to score 300 points more than a rich white lax bro for the same shot is a travesty.

Your grievances are misguided.

The truth is that legacy admissions are the real issue.

If your kid can't get into Harvard with that advantage (assuming all of the high dollar test prep and cushy tutoring worked), then sorry.

You can have more than one real issue: legacies, Asian Americans, athletes, etc. They are all problematic.

Actually measuring someone by test scores is the real problem.

We don’t want just people good at tests in colleges.

Give me athletes, artists and legacies over test scores any day

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Higher education shoud be mainly for acedemic merit and must be color blind.

Actually, higher education is about far more than just academics.

That’s not an excuse to make it about race. Nice attempt.

So you would be ok attending a school with 95% Asians and Whites.

Majority of schools are already 95% white and asians.

THIS. I’m just starting the process as the parent of a white kid at a HS that is 17% white and it’s amazing to see the lack of diversity at colleges and the bias in admissions. I know this will be shot down but the SCOTOS but it should stay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a white person with both white kids and asian kids. I do not think my asian kids raised in the same house should have to score 300 points higher on the SAT for the same shot at admissions to my alma mater (Harvard). That is pure racism and I will never vote democrat again after seeing how they support this.

Yeah.. having to score 300 points more than a rich white lax bro for the same shot is a travesty.

Your grievances are misguided.

The truth is that legacy admissions are the real issue.

If your kid can't get into Harvard with that advantage (assuming all of the high dollar test prep and cushy tutoring worked), then sorry.

You can have more than one real issue: legacies, Asian Americans, athletes, etc. They are all problematic.

Actually measuring someone by test scores is the real problem.

We don’t want just people good at tests in colleges.

Give me athletes, artists and legacies over test scores any day

I can see the argument for artists, and maybe athletes - but when you add legacy that suggests to me that you are OK with racial discrimination.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Higher education shoud be mainly for acedemic merit and must be color blind.

Actually, higher education is about far more than just academics.

That’s not an excuse to make it about race. Nice attempt.

So you would be ok attending a school with 95% Asians and Whites.

Majority of schools are already 95% white and asians.

THIS. I’m just starting the process as the parent of a white kid at a HS that is 17% white and it’s amazing to see the lack of diversity at colleges and the bias in admissions. I know this will be shot down but the SCOTOS but it should stay.

The top schools are 50% or more non-white. And what bias are you talking about? The bias and handicap afforded URMs? Your post is quite literally the dumbest thing I’ve read in quite a long time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Higher education shoud be mainly for acedemic merit and must be color blind.

Actually, higher education is about far more than just academics.

In the United States, higher education is not only for academic merit. If that was it, the process could be a lot simpler. We could do it more like the NBA draft. Colleges want letters of recommendation, essays, extra curricular, etc…., and race

You can ACQUIRE grades, ECs, writing skills to write good essays, etc… but you cannot acquire a race. So race needs to be removed from the equation. Period.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Higher education shoud be mainly for acedemic merit and must be color blind.

Actually, higher education is about far more than just academics.

In the United States, higher education is not only for academic merit. If that was it, the process could be a lot simpler. We could do it more like the NBA draft. Colleges want letters of recommendation, essays, extra curricular, etc…., and race

You can ACQUIRE grades, ECs, writing skills to write good essays, etc… but you cannot acquire a race. So race needs to be removed from the equation. Period.

Race is in the equation for everything else in these student's upbringing....so leave it there for college as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Higher education shoud be mainly for acedemic merit and must be color blind.

Actually, higher education is about far more than just academics.

That’s not an excuse to make it about race. Nice attempt.

So you would be ok attending a school with 95% Asians and Whites.

Majority of schools are already 95% white and asians.

THIS. I’m just starting the process as the parent of a white kid at a HS that is 17% white and it’s amazing to see the lack of diversity at colleges and the bias in admissions. I know this will be shot down but the SCOTOS but it should stay.

The US is only 13% black and 6% Asian. Colleges should be majority white because the US is majority white. The elite colleges that are 50% minority have way over-corrected.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a white person with both white kids and asian kids. I do not think my asian kids raised in the same house should have to score 300 points higher on the SAT for the same shot at admissions to my alma mater (Harvard). That is pure racism and I will never vote democrat again after seeing how they support this.

I saw this post last night and thought someone else would call this poster out, and I wouldn't need to, but I guess not. If you actually read the Harvard study, Asian admitted students seem to score 25-50 points higher on the SAT than white admits. This is a difference of 2-3 questions, not 300 points, and something that can certainly be made up for with impressive extracurriculars, higher weighted GPAs, or great essays, thanks to holistic admissions.

College admissions are incredibly unfair in many ways, not just this one. Your kids will all have legacy status, something most applicants would kill to have. However, private colleges have the right to form their class in whatever way they want. They can favor children of alumni or athletes along with children who grew up in foster care or below the poverty line. They want schools diverse in race, class, perspective, and lifestyle, where students can learn from each other and leave after four years with an expanded worldview. Sometimes this involves giving a boost to Latino, Black, or Native applicants, whose applications might not be as impressive because of the problems many minorities in America face growing up (they have to work to provide for their families and cannot start non-profits, their households are broken and tumultuous, they don't have the academic advantages of having ivy-league-educated parents).

Imagine voting for the anti-democracy, anti-choice party because you are upset at the democrats' "woke" messaging (not to mention that they have no control over the admissions process at private schools). Unbelievable that you went to Harvard and cannot see this.